Article about the new Atari Asteroids Recharged arcade games. Has pictures and video

[TampaBay]

The underlying premise of my post was not really about the merits of a 30 year old 3D Missile Command game, but rather that here in 2024, they did significantly less with the new Asteroids, even with today's technology three decades later, than they did with Missile Command in 1995.  I just feel there's so many great things they could have done with Asteroids.

[+jeremiahjt]

10 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

The underlying premise of my post was not really about the merits of a 30 year old 3D Missile Command game, but rather that here in 2024, they did significantly less with the new Asteroids, even with today's technology three decades later, than they did with Missile Command in 1995.  I just feel there's so many great things they could have done with Asteroids.

There is a limit to what they can do.  If too much is done, then it is no longer Asteroids.  I am not saying they got close here, but there is such thing getting too far away from the core gameplay.

[TampaBay]

3 minutes ago, jeremiahjt said:

If too much is done, then it is no longer Asteroids.  I am not saying they got close here, but there is such thing getting too far away from the core gameplay.

 

Agreed 100%.  It's definitely a balancing act.  Though looking at that Missile Command game from so along ago, it just made me think of what could have been with Asteroids.  Especially the first of those two versions of Missile Command, which definitely still feels like Missile Command.

 

(For the record, the second of the two versions was a separate game designed and created for Atari Jaguar Virtual Reality Goggles -- those goggles apparently never made it to production.  They decided to include that second game anyway, I guess, even though the VR goggles didn't exist.  I'm assuming that the game play was tailored to the use of the Goggles).

 

I actually like Asteroids: Recharged just fine.  For under 10 bucks, I bought it and I play it on Nintendo Switch.  Would I have made a $15,000 per cabinet arcade version of that game though?  (Yes, that's what it costs for the 3 player version).

[+jeremiahjt]

Just now, TampaBay said:

 

Agreed 100%.  It's definitely a balancing act.  Though looking at that Missile Command game from so along ago, it just made me think of what could have been with Asteroids.  Especially the first of those two versions of Missile Command, which definitely still feels like Missile Command.

 

(For the record, the second of the two versions was a separate game designed and created for Atari Jaguar Virtual Reality Goggles -- those goggles apparently never made it to production.  They decided to include that second game anyway, I guess, even though the VR goggles didn't exist.  I'm assuming that the game play was tailored to the use of the Goggles).

 

I actually like Asteroids: Recharged just fine.  For under 10 bucks, I bought it and I play it on Nintendo Switch.  Would I have made a $15,000 per cabinet arcade version of that game though?  (Yes, that's what it costs for the 3 player version).

I always wanted to try out the Virtual Reality headset with Missile Command 3D.  I have Missile Command 3D, but I have not played it too much.  I think I found the game a little difficult to get too into it.

 

As far as the price, hey, the two player version is only $6,500!

[ledzep]

21 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

The underlying premise of my post was not really about the merits of a 30 year old 3D Missile Command game, but rather that here in 2024, they did significantly less with the new Asteroids, even with today's technology three decades later, than they did with Missile Command in 1995.  I just feel there's so many great things they could have done with Asteroids.

 

I agree, I was just pointing out the differences, from a arcade fan of that bygone era, between the first and second versions compared to the original.  As jeremiahjt pointed out, you go too far, it ain't the game you say it is anymore.  I think also that the first attempts to modernize classic recognizable games should be conservative in terms of amount of changes and updates.  Sort of like when these most recent versions of retro muscle cars showed up, they were pretty close to the spirit of the original versions.  The Mustang and Camaro started deviating after a few years, the Challenger stayed basically true to the original look.

 

My point was that as a Missile Command fan I would be able to recognize that first version of Missile Command as a new "recharged" update to the original whereas the second version isn't really Missile Command at all because the gameplay is so far away from the original and much closer to the way other unrelated games play.  It's a hard line to walk.  Otherwise, just name it something else.

 

Even with doing significantly less changes, that Asteroids Recharged is going to be boring pretty quickly if they don't offer an option to play with the smaller asteroids moving faster and the saucers moving like they're actually trying to stay alive rather than trying to transport a bunch of geriatrics to the assisted living asteroid.

[TampaBay]

2 minutes ago, jeremiahjt said:

As far as the price, hey, the two player version is only $6,500!

 

😀 Well I hope to come across one in the wild so I can see what $6,500 gets you!!  I'll certainly give it a try!

[TampaBay]

6 minutes ago, ledzep said:

 

I agree, I was just pointing out the differences, from a arcade fan of that bygone era, between the first and second versions compared to the original.  As jeremiahjt pointed out, you go too far, it ain't the game you say it is anymore.  I think also that the first attempts to modernize classic recognizable games should be conservative in terms of amount of changes and updates.  Sort of like when these most recent versions of retro muscle cars showed up, they were pretty close to the spirit of the original versions.  The Mustang and Camaro started deviating after a few years, the Challenger stayed basically true to the original look.

 

My point was that as a Missile Command fan I would be able to recognize that first version of Missile Command as a new "recharged" update to the original whereas the second version isn't really Missile Command at all because the gameplay is so far away from the original and much closer to the way other unrelated games play.  It's a hard line to walk.  Otherwise, just name it something else.

 

Even with doing significantly less changes, that Asteroids Recharged is going to be boring pretty quickly if they don't offer an option to play with the smaller asteroids moving faster and the saucers moving like they're actually trying to stay alive rather than trying to transport a bunch of geriatrics to the assisted living asteroid.

 

Yep, I agree on all of your points as well.  Especially the Dodge Charger!  I purposely rented a V8 one the other day for fun, because they had it (relatively) cheap at my local Hertz under the Hertz Adrenaline Collection.  That is a super fun car.  

 

As for the games, yes agree.  Not sure if you saw my comment above about the Virtual Reality goggles, but I can only assume the gameplay on the 2nd version had something specific to do with VR, which made it deviate so far from the original.  I enjoyed the first 3D version much more.  I'm going to play it a little more later tonight.

Edited April 3 by TampaBay

[TampaBay]

ps. If either of you have any recommendations for other Jaguar games, please let me know!  So far my favorite is probably Alien vs. Predator.  I heard Tempest 2000 was supposed to be really good.  It was a little too manic for me.  The same with Defender 2000.

 

pps. Here's the 2023 Challenger I rented.  (Typo on my part above... Challenger not Charger).  Great styling and really fun to drive.

 

Edited April 4 by TampaBay

[+jeremiahjt]

12 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

So far my favorite is probably Alien vs. Predator.  I heard Tempest 2000 was supposed to be really good.  It was a little too manic for me.  The same with Defender 2000.

Not to turn this into a Jaguar thread, but this is me. I like Tempest 2000, but I much prefer Alien vs. Predator. I also enjoy a lot more Jaguar games, but for anything more we should probably move to the Jaguar forum. 

[TampaBay]

12 minutes ago, jeremiahjt said:

Not to turn this into a Jaguar thread, but this is me. I like Tempest 2000, but I much prefer Alien vs. Predator. I also enjoy a lot more Jaguar games, but for anything more we should probably move to the Jaguar forum. 

Cool.  Yeah if I've got additional questions about the Jaguar, I'll definitely do it over there.  I only mentioned it here because Tempest 2000 and Defender 2000 were two additional "remakes" of well loved classics and I happen to play them both for the first time on the Jaguar.

Edited April 4 by TampaBay

[ledzep]

1 hour ago, TampaBay said:

As for the games, yes agree.  Not sure if you saw my comment above about the Virtual Reality goggles, but I can only assume the gameplay on the 2nd version had something specific to do with VR, which made it deviate so far from the original.  I enjoyed the first 3D version much more.  I'm going to play it a little more later tonight.

 

Probably, but I get the idea that most VR games would sort of look the same the way that most driving games look the same, meaning you can call it whatever you like but it's going to be 90% like the other 5 games that use those goggles, just different colors and shapes and power-ups.

 

32 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

pps. Here's the 2023 Challenger I rented.  (Typo on my part above... Challenger not Charger).  Great styling and really fun to drive.

 

 

There you go.  Not as good as the original (looks, not performance) but anyone who likes the original version will recognize this one and give it the benefit of the doubt.

 

On the other hand, you show that same person this magnificent piece of shit -

 

 

and all you will get is disgust.  A 1981 Dodge "Challenger", you say, hahaaha (come to think of it, I've never seen one at a Mopar car show).  Uh, no, I don't care what the nameplate says, that's a Mitsubishi something, get it away from me!  That's the mental repulsion I experience when I see those home "recharged" versions of classic Atari arcade games that bear almost no gameplay resemblance to the originals.  But the Alan-1 version of Asteroids has potential.  So does that Jaguar Missile Command update (the first version).

[TampaBay]

8 minutes ago, ledzep said:

 

Probably, but I get the idea that most VR games would sort of look the same the way that most driving games look the same, meaning you can call it whatever you like but it's going to be 90% like the other 5 games that use those goggles, just different colors and shapes and power-ups.

 

 

There you go.  Not as good as the original (looks, not performance) but anyone who likes the original version will recognize this one and give it the benefit of the doubt.

 

On the other hand, you show that same person this magnificent piece of shit -

 

 

and all you will get is disgust.  A 1981 Dodge "Challenger", you say, hahaaha (come to think of it, I've never seen one at a Mopar car show).  Uh, no, I don't care what the nameplate says, that's a Mitsubishi something, get it away from me!  That's the mental repulsion I experience when I see those home "recharged" versions of classic Atari arcade games that bear almost no gameplay resemblance to the originals.  But the Alan-1 version of Asteroids has potential.  So does that Jaguar Missile Command update (the first version).

 

That car has no business wearing a Challenger badge.  Wow.

 

Time will tell what the response is to the new Asteroids cabinet.   In just a few months I'll hopefully come across one. 

[+jeremiahjt]

19 minutes ago, ledzep said:

On the other hand, you show that same person this magnificent piece of shit -

 

 

and all you will get is disgust.  A 1981 Dodge "Challenger", you say, hahaaha (come to think of it, I've never seen one at a Mopar car show).  Uh, no, I don't care what the nameplate says, that's a Mitsubishi something, get it away from me!  That's the mental repulsion I experience when I see those home "recharged" versions of classic Atari arcade games that bear almost no gameplay resemblance to the originals.  But the Alan-1 version of Asteroids has potential.  So does that Jaguar Missile Command update (the first version).

I do not think I ever knew this is what the original Challenger ended up looking like.  I am sure I saw some on the road back in the '80s and '90s, but I just did not realize what they were.  Or possibly I once knew this and just completely forgot.

[TampaBay]

A picture's worth a thousand words, so I'll leave you with this.

 

After over Forty Years of advancing technology, this is the difference between the original Asteroids from 1979 and the new version from around 2021:

 

 

 

Compare that with the original Missile Command from 1980 and the home console version on the Atari Jaguar from 1995 (nearly 30 years ago):

 

 

I'll let the screenshots speak for themselves.

 

Edited April 4 by TampaBay

[ledzep]

9 hours ago, TampaBay said:

A picture's worth a thousand words, so I'll leave you with this.

 

After over Forty Years of advancing technology, this is the difference between the original Asteroids from 1979 and the new version from around 2021:

 

 

 

Compare that with the original Missile Command from 1980 and the home console version on the Atari Jaguar from 1995 (nearly 30 years ago):

 

 

I'll let the screenshots speak for themselves.

 

 

I'm not sure what your point is, though.  Do the graphics actually matter?  I mean, do you think Blasteroids is way better than Asteroids because the asteroids now look like rocks instead of vector outlines of rocks?

 

 

For me the gameplay was always far more important than shaded objects.  Even back in 1987 you had power-ups from Atari yet I don't hear modern supposed "gamers" praising that version.  I think clearing the sectors is too easy, doesn't take long enough but it's not a bad idea change to the original Asteroids.  I just don't care about the rendered asteroids or the random planet backgrounds, they add dick to the gameplay.  So this new Alan-1 version at least pays homage to the original but if the gameplay is weak then it won't matter what it looks like.  Which is true of all arcade games.

 

If you take an older gutless car like, say, a Datsun 510 and switch out the whole suspension and drivetrain to something modern (gas or electric, doesn't matter) with a lot more performance, are you seriously going to complain that the car isn't fun to drive simply because it still looks like the old car?  That's crazy.

 

As for Missile Command, it's supposed to be a representation of an ABM operator's display as he's defending cities from incoming ICBMs.  I'm not saying it's accurate to what the military would use (it's a game, not a training simulator) but the spirit of that idea is certainly there, it has a very radar screen design.  I don't get why some gamers discount that as unimportant, it's part of what makes the game Missile Command and not just shoot random shit falling from the skies.  It's like those clowns have never seen a radar display or would insist that the radar display be modified to show 3D rendered versions of the same objects and rendered ground/water in order to be able to use it.

 

The new Jaguar version is a mess of different scales and shitty textures, those "cities" cannot be the correct size compared to those gigantic boulders pretending to be mountains, everything in that version looks like little plastic toys on a kid's messy bedroom floor.  The original version looks much cooler and has way better sound effects and gameplay.  I do like the change in perspective in the Jaguar version but other than that, all of it is worse than the original, which should be impossible given the extra years and technology available to come up with something better or cooler.

[TampaBay]

38 minutes ago, ledzep said:

 

I'm not sure what your point is, though.  

 

For me the gameplay was always far more important than shaded objects.  I just don't care about the rendered asteroids or the random planet backgrounds, they add dick to the gameplay. 

 

Anyone who feels this way which is perfectly valid, should continue to play and enjoy the original Asteroids.  I do.  If the gameplay on the original is enjoyable and better graphics are of no importance, there is no need to play any kind of updated version.  Just play the original.  I play the original all the time because I think it's great.

 

My point is that IF someone is going to remake it, then REMAKE it.  Blow my mind.  Take advantage of FORTY YEARS of advanced technology.  Make me stop in my tracks in the arcade and say "holy crap!!  This is insane!!  The Asteroids: Recharged remake is barely, marginally, every so slightly an incremental advancement of the original.  And that's being generous.  If the original was built in 1979, the new version could have been 1980.  I don't know what could be possible with Asteroids: Recharged now, I'm not a game designer, but I know something could have been built that is faithful to the original and still a tremendous, giant leap forward.  The point of the Missile Command example is to simply show that a fairly significant leap forward occured in 1995 with Missile Command 3D.  You hate it.  Fair enough.  That's preference.  The point is someone took advantage of the technology at the time and greatly advanced Missile Command (regardless of whether it may or may not be your personal cup of tea).  Here we are decades later, and Asteroids Recharged brings little to the table.  I might as well just play the original.  I'm not sure how familiar you are with the various arcade Star Wars games, but for example, the 1983 vector Star Wars cabinet was absolutely amazing.  One of my favorite games of all time.  (I own a reproduction in my man cave).  In 1998 Sega came out with the "Star Wars Trilogy" cabinet, which is just incredible (again, maybe not YOUR cup of tea).  The first three boards of Star Wars Trilogy are almost identical to the 1983 version in theme, but brought up to date with the technology of the time.  I personally think it's AMAZING.  It's like being in the movie.  That's the type of advancement I expected to see in a new Asteroids cabinet.

[TampaBay]

Probably the clearest way I can articulate my point it this:

 

I'm not only looking at the remakes in reference to my personal opinion of the choices that the developers / designers made.  I'm also measuring them up to what is "generally possible" given today's technology, what is the "potential" in a remake and did they live up to that potential (regardless of whether or not I like the specific choices.)

 

Missile Command 3D showed what was possible in 1995 vs. the 1980 original.  My opinion on their particular choices set aside.

 

Star Wars Trilogy showed what was possible in 1998 vs. the 1983 original.  Trilogy was a massive seismic warp speed leap into the future.  In that particular case I loved the remake, but even if I hadn't loved their specific choices, I would have appreciated what they did.

 

Asteroids: Recharged leaves me somewhat baffled.  I can see the point of a $9 copy for Nintendo Switch, I guess.  Plunking down $15,000 for a 3 player version for an arcade?  Maybe it's me, but I'm just not seeing it.

 

 

[ledzep]

17 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

Anyone who feels this way which is perfectly valid, should continue to play and enjoy the original Asteroids.  I do.  If the gameplay on the original is enjoyable and better graphics are of no importance, there is no need to play any kind of updated version.  Just play the original.  I play the original all the time because I think it's great.

 

Not entirely true.  If you want (mostly) the original Asteroids in terms of looks and gameplay, but you'd like to play a 2-3 player version, and you like reasonable power-ups, then this game is perfect (if it's not too easy or boring).  I'd like to try a 3-player version of Asteroids, with the correct controllers and same gameplay (shooting, asteroid movement).

 

19 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

My point is that IF someone is going to remake it, then REMAKE it.  Blow my mind.  Take advantage of FORTY YEARS of advanced technology.  Make me stop in my tracks in the arcade and say "holy crap!!  This is insane!!  The Asteroids: Recharged remake is barely, marginally, every so slightly an incremental advancement of the original.  And that's being generous.  If the original was built in 1979, the new version could have been 1980.

 

You mean Asteroids Deluxe?  There's also Space Duel.  Consider both of those.  They were very popular even though the changes were marginal but welcomed.  They were still different enough for some players to prefer the newer versions.  I honestly don't remember a lot of arcade gamers loving Blasteroids.  They played because it was new, always looking for new, but I don't remember it being a big deal.  Again, I do like the updates in Blasteroids, the goal of clearing sectors, the power-ups, but the gameplay suffered.  That's inexcusable.  And the updated eye candy graphics didn't matter.

 

21 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

I don't know what could be possible with Asteroids: Recharged now, I'm not a game designer, but I know something could have been built that is faithful to the original and still a tremendous, giant leap forward.

 

Probably true.  Why would the graphics have to change significantly?  You speak of a "holy crap!" reaction, how is that going to happen if many people passing by can't even recognize that it's an Asteroids update because the look is significantly different?  How far do you think you can change a game before it bears no resemblance to the original game?  If you want a large change to the look and gameplay, call it something else, problem solved.  If you expect fans of the original to care about your recharged update, it better look and feel very close to the original, otherwise it's false advertising and you'll get a lot of "Aw, this isn't like Asteroids at all..." disappointment.  It's not the worst thing to just make a new game "sort of" like a previous idea, there were dozens of Galaxian clones/updates out there, some were fantastic like Galaga, Space Firebird, Phoenix, etc., and they didn't suffer because they weren't called Galaxian Recharged.

 

What "giant leap forward"?  If it's still a top-down radar view perspective, what can be changed?  I suppose you could have a 1st person version, sort of like Star Wars or Star Trek: SOS where you're spinning around trying to blast asteroids coming at you, but otherwise, what giant leap forward could be had while still keeping it recognizably "Asteroids"?  There's only so much you can do, honestly, and I say this as someone who played all those games back then and saw many variations of certain themes.

 

33 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

The point of the Missile Command example is to simply show that a fairly significant leap forward occured in 1995 with Missile Command 3D.  You hate it.  Fair enough.  That's preference.

 

Not entirely true.  I liked the idea of the changed perspective, I hated the clunky implementation.  Certainly it could be improved today with faster chips and better displays.

 

34 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

The point is someone took advantage of the technology at the time and greatly advanced Missile Command (regardless of whether it may or may not be your personal cup of tea).

 

What was "greatly advanced" about it?  Still missiles coming down.  Still anti-missiles fired at those missiles.  Still cities that needed to be protected and that could be destroyed.  All that was changed was a slightly more detailed set of objects (that looked shitty compared to what was the goal) and a different perspective (which was the best part).  It's a very basic game idea that requires very smooth, quick gameplay.  You can't change it too much or it's no longer Missile Command.  You can add fireworks and booming music and strippers to blackjack, it's still blackjack, just more busy.  The moment you add new card values and rules to the game, it's no longer blackjack even if it still uses cards.  Do you understand?

 

39 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

Here we are decades later, and Asteroids Recharged brings little to the table.  I might as well just play the original.

 

The original doesn't have power-ups or multi-player options so you'd be missing out on those extras.  There were many arcade games I played that I wish could have had more than one player at a time.  I loved games like Wizard Of Wor and Rip-Off for that reason, they were actually much less fun single player.  I think you're starting to see, even as you resist the reality of it, that you can't significantly change any arcade game and still have it be recognizable as that same thing.  They're not adventure games.  They're quick shooters and platformers and driving/flying/fighting sims, a few puzzle games.  That's it.  Changing the graphics doesn't mean shit if the gameplay is reduced.

 

46 minutes ago, TampaBay said:

I'm not sure how familiar you are with the various arcade Star Wars games, but for example, the 1983 vector Star Wars cabinet was absolutely amazing.  One of my favorite games of all time.  (I own a reproduction in my man cave).  In 1998 Sega came out with the "Star Wars Trilogy" cabinet, which is just incredible (again, maybe not YOUR cup of tea).  The first three boards of Star Wars Trilogy are almost identical to the 1983 version in theme, but brought up to date with the technology of the time.  I personally think it's AMAZING.  It's like being in the movie.  That's the type of advancement I expected to see in a new Asteroids cabinet.

 

I loved the original Star Wars game and the The Empire Strikes Back update.  They lost me with that boring Return Of The Jedi game.  I remember looking at the Trilogy game and not being that excited about it.  Not saying it was bad, it just didn't grab me but then I never went to the arcade wanting to be in a movie.

 

 

Ah, now it's coming back to me.  Ya, it's a game on rails.  So what, so was the original Star Wars vector game.  But what was "amazing" about this version?  Ignore the graphics (which are pretty good looking) and the background, what are you looking at?  Basically Tail Gunner or Red Baron (both of which I prefer) or Star Trek: SOS (the coolest of the bunch) or Starhawk (lesser gameplay) but with raster graphics and a lot more eye candy that doesn't affect the gameplay at all, it just looks cool (I do like the lightsaber parts, though, but it seems very clunky without having a lightsaber type controller).  Move the targeting pip around, shoot the enemies.  What the fuck are you flying in?  It feels more like being in a turret in the Falcon than being in an X-Wing fighter where you mostly have to aim the guns by aiming the whole ship.  It is no different than playing Cobra Command, a Data East laserdisc shooting game that I personally loved but that was limited in what you could do.

[TampaBay]

8 minutes ago, ledzep said:

I think you're starting to see, even as you resist the reality of it, that you can't significantly change any arcade game and still have it be recognizable as that same thing.  

 

 

I think this hits the nail on the head as to where we don't see eye to eye.  I don't agree with this statement at all.  I think you can significantly change a game and many aspects from gameplay to graphics, while still being inspired by the original, so much so that a stranger walking by who never saw it before would say "hey, this cool new game really reminds me of Asteroids".  That's what I think should have happened.  I recognize that for you once you bend far enough, it's an entirely new game.  Fair enough.  For me, as long as its reminiscent of the original, I would prefer to see radical changes if someone is going to spend the time, energy, and massive financial investment to make a new version.  I don't necessarily think the developers and / or Alan-1 are attempting to cater to people like us who love the original.  I think they'd have more success leveraging the formula of Asteroids while catering to the modern gamer as well.  It's a business, and in the end they are in it to make money, not have guys like us applaud their faithfulness to the original.  Shaggy will be able to tell us soon enough how it fairs in the wild, since I believe he'll have a cabinet in his arcade.  I'm rooting for it, but I'm not sure I'm too optimistic about its financial prospects.

 

As for Star Wars, obviously if you feel that the second screenshot of these two is not a leap forward, then we're not going to agree.  I totally get that graphics are not that important to you, especially relatively to game play.  I don't feel that way.  I'm looking not just at game play, but also an immersive experience.  You don't want to feel like you're "in the movie", but I do.  So the incredible graphics and stellar soundtrack for me personally, were a massive step forward to that end.  I think both games are great.

 

I respect your opinion on all of this.  We may not totally see eye to eye, but that's OK.  I'm really looking forward to hearing what Shaggy has to say when he sees customers interacting with the new Asteroids machine, whether that's walking right by it without giving it a second look, or stopping to play it for a while.  Will be fascinating to watch.

 

 

 

 

[Lord Mushroom]

1 hour ago, ledzep said:

If it's still a top-down radar view perspective, what can be changed?

I have always thought the graphics in Asteroids is supposed to show the actual things, and not a representation of them on a radar screen.

[Lord Mushroom]

1 hour ago, TampaBay said:

Shaggy will be able to tell us soon enough how it fairs in the wild, since I believe he'll have a cabinet in his arcade.  I'm rooting for it, but I'm not sure I'm too optimistic about its financial prospects.

I don´t think that experiment is going to be very useful, because Asteroid Recharged´s biggest selling point is being a vdeo redemption game, and Shaggy doesn´t offer redemption. I think it is pretty safe to say it will do poorly in Shaggy´s arcade.

[TampaBay]

3 minutes ago, Lord Mushroom said:

I don´t think that experiment is going to be very useful, because Asteroid Recharged´s biggest selling point is being a vdeo redemption game, and Shaggy doesn´t offer redemption. I think it is pretty safe to say it will do poorly in Shaggy´s arcade.

Agreed.  I'm not too confident that remdemption would be enough to save it either way.  My opinion is that the customer base of "nostalgia" players is too small for this to be financially successful from that group, and that the game doesn't offer enough for the modern gamer to entice that group either.  That's where I've been going for most of this thread.  I feel it's too faithful to the original, so you'll get people like me who love the original and will give it a try, but it offers very little to the much larger consumer base of modern gamers.  I don't like my predictions to be wrong 😀, but in this case, I hope I'm wrong, because I really would like it to succeed for everyone involved.

[Lord Mushroom]

I think it would be very difficult to wow us with graphics in Asteroids Rehcarged while maintaining the same gameplay as in the original. They could have made it a lot more realistic. Made it look good even, like the graphics in Dariusburst Another Chronicle EX:

 

But for a graphical wow-factor, they would have to make it 3D, and that would have changed the gameplay.

 

Of course, they could have wowed us with (more) cool additions to the gameplay.

[TampaBay]

3 minutes ago, Lord Mushroom said:

I think it would be very difficult to wow us with graphics in Asteroids Rehcarged while maintaining the same gameplay as in the original. They could have made it a lot more realistic. Made it look good even, like the graphics in Dariusburst Another Chronicle EX:

 

But for a graphical wow-factor, they would have to make it 3D, and that would have changed the gameplay.

 

Of course, they could have wowed us with (more) cool additions to the gameplay.

 

Those graphics look awesome to me.  I'm not familiar with that game, but yes, had Recharged looked even remotely like that, I'd probably have less to say about the project and its prospects.

 

I just can't envision a younger person who is entirely unfamiliar with Asteroids walking by the Recharged cabinet, looking at those "vector-like" graphics, and stopping to play it vs. moving on to one of the modern games that Shaggy says are his best sellers / most popular.  I go to the arcade a lot.  And not just one type of arcade, but several, from retro-only to the large Family Entertainment Centers.  I may not have Shaggy's 16 years running an arcade, but I see all of this first-hand frequently.  All that said, we'll see one way or another.  I've been surprised before, no doubt it will happen again.

 

 

 

 

[Lord Mushroom]

I think Asteroids Recharged has a decent chance of succeeding in the arcades. That is because video redemption games, which they are competing against, don´t have spectacular graphics. They have simple graphics. In that sense, Asteroids Recharged delivers.

 

Asteroids Recharged´s biggest problem is, in my opinion, that it has a steep learning curve. Steering, firing, thrusting and occasionally warping at the same time is difficult at first, especially for kids. I fear many will try it once, die quickly and not play it again if it is too difficult for first time players.